AUTHORSHIP AND UNITY IN THE EXETER BOOK RIDDLES by John Neilson Mason B.A., University of British Columbia, 1972 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of English We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1976 © John Neilson Mason, 1976 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of ENGLISH The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date MAY 7, 1976 - ii - ABSTRACT Nineteenth-century scholars generally felt that the Exeter Book riddle collection was a unified whole under the authorship of Cynewulf, or that it was made up of two major parts, Riddles "1" (now known as "Wul'f and Eadwacer") to 59 and 61-95. Most scholars since the first decade of this century, however, have viewed the riddles as a miscellany, with a few individual riddles perhaps sharing common authorship, but with no overall unity or organization in the collection as a whole. If the riddles are examined in terms of their point of view (I am..., I saw..., There is...), a distinct pattern emerges which demonstrates Riddles 61-95 to be separate from the rest, and which also divides Riddles 1-59 into two more or less equal groups. The distribution of point of view does not indicate the exact point of division between the first two groups, but if the groups originally comprised 60 riddles (like the collection of Eusebius), and if the two groups are assumed to have been equal collections of 30, then deduction based on the amount of missing material due to the loss of folios between fols. 105 and 106, and between 111 and 112, would locate the break between Riddles 29 and 30. Riddle 30b, then, could have been simply a mis-start of the second group at a point later in the MS. Examination of the distribution of opening and closing formulas arid of the adverbs hwilum, oft and nu over the collection supports the three-part theory. Stylistic diversity in the third group, from crude riddles like Nos. 75 and 76 to the fine 'horn' and 'water' riddles suggests that •oh:' - this group is a miscellany containing the work of a number of authors. Connections between riddles of this group and the two earlier ones appear to indicate some sort of dependence of these on riddles of the first two groups. The relationship in several of the cases can be explained as imitation or modelling of the later riddles on earlier ones. Such a suggestion is not inconsistent with practice at the time, as other riddles of the period appear to have been used as exercises in grammar. - iv - CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I THE CYNEWULFIAN CONTROVERSY 1 Footnotes to Chapter I 18 CHAPTER II IS THERE UNITY IN THE COLLECTION? 21 Treatment of Material 21 Unity and Sources 27 Arguments Based on Date 29 Footnotes to Chapter II 35 CHAPTER III SECTIONS OF THE TEXT AS SEPARATE UNITS 37 Evidence for Distinct Groups in the Collection 37 The Original Groupings Ul Opening and Closing Formulas, and Three Adverbs i|8 The Relationship Between the Groups 57 Footnotes to Chapter III 66 CONCLUSION 69 LIST OF WORKS CONSULTED 71 APPENDIX A 77. APPENDIX B 78 APPENDIX C 80 _ v - LIST OF TABLES Table I Distribution of Points of View p. 38 Table II Distribution of Opening and Closing Formulas p. 50 Table III Frequency of Opening and Closing Formulas p. 51 Table IV Occurrence of hwilum, oft and nu i. Adverb Begins Half-Line p. 53 ii. Scribal Point Precedes Adverb p. 51i - vi - LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Forster's Collation of Gatherings XIV, XVI and XVII p. hh Figure 2 Possible Loss from Gathering XVII p. kh - vii - ABBREVIATIONS REB Frederick Tupper, ed., The Riddles of the Exeter Book (Boston: Ginn and Co., 1910). K-D G.P. Krapp and E.vK. Dobbie, eds., The Exeter Book (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936). EBOEP R.W. Chambers, Max Forster and Robin Flower, eds., The Exeter Book of Old English Poetry (London: Lund, Humphries and Co., 1933). - yiii- Note on Numbering The four, most widely-used editions of the Exeter Book riddles today are those of Tupper, Wyatt, Mackie and Krapp and Dobbie; earlier scholars usually used Grein's edition.1 Unfortunately, all these editions vary in their systems of numbering the riddles. Tupper includes "Wulf and Eadwacer" as his Riddle 1, but presents K-D 68 and 69 as one riddle. Wyatt and Mackie also group 68 and 69, but Mackie omits K-D 90, the Latin Riddle. Grein includes "Wulf and Eadwacer," but omits the fragments K-D 78, 82, 89, 92 and 9U. All numbering in this study will follow the Krapp and Dobbie system, but the following key can be used for adjusting the other systems to K-D numbering. Wyatt THEEe r K-D 1-68 = W 1-682 K'- D 1-68 = T 2-69 (K-D = T-l) K-D 69-89 = W 683-88 (K-D - W+l) K-D 69-95 = T 69-95 K-D 91-95 = W 89-93 (K-D = W+2) Mackie Grein ,2 K-D 1-66 » G 2-67 K-D 1-68 = M 1-68' K-D 68 = G 681"2 J K-D 69-95 = M 683-94 (K-D = M+l) K-D 69-77 = G 68 -76 K-D 79-81 = G 77-79 K-D 83-88 = G 80-85 K-D 90-91 = G 86-87 K-D 93 = G 88 K-D 95 = G 89 1 C W M Grein, Bibliothek der Angelsachsischen Poesie (Goetingen: Georg H. Wigands Verlag, ltJbo), n, Joy-u07- CHAPTER I THE CYNEWULFIAN CONTROVERSY A study of authorship and unity in the Exeter Book riddles is inextricably involved with the Cynewulfian controversy. This is the scholarly dispute which raged in the nineteenth century, and a little into the twentieth, in which opinions were voiced concerning possible authorship by Cynewulf of almost every piece of Anglo-Saxon poetry extant. The riddles were at the heart of the Cynewulfian dispute, due to charades on the name Cynewulf which were supposedly found in two of the riddles, and on alleged biographical details in another. These charades were thought to be similar to the runic signatures found in the four 'signed' Cynewulfian poems. The idea of Cynewulfian authorship of the riddles came for a while to be regarded almost as an established fact, but began losing favor in the 1880*s. Many scholars, still held to the theory, though, and it continued to be revived sporadically until 1910. The basis of the theory which assigned authorship to Cynewulf, indeed virtually the only piece of evidence upon which all the later opinions were grounded, was Heinrich Leo's solution of the so-called 1 v r 'First Riddle.' This poem, which appears on Folios 100 and 101 of the Exeter Book, and which immediately precedes in the MS the first group of what are now considered by most scholars the true riddles, is now generally known as "Wulf and Eadwacer." The inspiration for Leo's solution took place in 18U0, with the almost simultaneous, though completely independent discoveries, by 2 3 Jacob Grimm and John M. Kemble, that the runes at the end of the - 2 - Old English poems "Elene," "Juliana," and "Christ II," when properly arranged, formed the name Cynewulf in the first two cases, and Cynwulf in the third. Grimm and Kemble suggested that the person in question might be Cenwulf, Abbot of Peterborough, who flourished in the early tenth century; Grimm assigned no historical significance to the name, but supposed Cynewulf to have been an eighth-century Northumbrian, per• haps a pupil of Aldhelra. The discovery of an author's name connected with Anglo-Saxon verse, in contrast to the usual complete anonymity of the poetry, was an exciting find which prompted a minute search over the next few decades for more hidden signatures in Old English poetry. As well, specifically Cynewulfian features were claimed for many unsigned poems, and scholars tentatively assigned more and more works to Cynewulf. An early product of this research, and one which added considerable impetus to further investigation, was Leo's 'discovery' in 18£7^ of a charade in the First Riddle, which, he claimed, revealed the name of Cynewulf. By a process of emendation and twisting of meaning to suit his purpose, , Leo produced an ingenious interpretation which finds the whole poem to be a play on the syllables of Cynewulf's name. I reproduce here the original and Leo's interpretation. For Morley's English trans• lation of Leo see Appendix A. - 3 - . Leodum is minura swylce him mon lac gifej willa3 hy hlne abecgan, gif he on breat cyme5. Ungelic is us. Wulf is on iege, ic on oberre. Faest is baet eglond, fenne biworpen. Sindon waelreowe weras baer on ige; willa8 hy hine apecgan, gif he on preat cyme5. Ungelice is us. Wulfes ic mines widlastum wenum dogode; bonne hit waes renig weder ond ic reotugu saet, bonne mec se beaducafa bogum bilegde, waes me wyn to pon, waes me hwaebre eac lad.